Only valid for active forum users. Active means at least 30 postings within the last 30 days (no spam postings). This will automatically being checked at www.starbike.com shopping basket so make sure that you are logged in at the WW board!If there does not appear a WW discount position when you check out you do not have enough postings!

With the introduction of Colnago's new disc equipped road bike, does anyone have an opinion of 135 spacing and whether or not it's going to catch on quickly. I was thinking of buying a new road bike this year, but I'm not going to do that if spacing standards are going to change (in the near future). What with Sram's impending launch of a Red level disc brake, it would suck if high end road bikes went to 135, like next year. Thoughts from some of the experts here?

If it catches on, then yes, road frames will almost by necessity have to be built with 135mm spacing. The stays and forks will also have to be different and reinforced at the brake tabs etc. Wheels will have to be built differently since current light road wheels can't take the stresses that disc brakes would exert on the rims. Plus, the mechanical groupsets would need major changes to them as well. You would almost be forced to use something like Di2 if you wanted to run the disc brakes at the beginning. Like chronsy said, this change is not going to happen overnight, but it is interesting. Don't see the need for them on high end road bikes where every gram counts. Could be great for beefy commuters, cross bikes, etc. And of course, there's nothing better on a mountain bike. But for road... meh.

Keep in mind that 135 spacing came about and works well - but with compromises - for 3 chainring mountain bikes. So now when you have a dual chainring up front the optimal chainline (front vs rear) is not present......then say you run a std dual chainring you can have many more people having issues with heel strike occuring on the chain stays (if 135 in the rear). On the otherhand, stick with the wider crankset and crankset chainline for mountain bikes and you'll have those many more complaining of the wider "Q" factor........as the human body is not going to suddenly widen overnight.

There are limits..........my view is that with dual chainrings 130 in the rear is it.

I think the new 5 mm is on the non drive side... so no change to the drive side...

and because I weight 200lb and want/need the the new 5mm on the drive side to make the wheel stronger kind upsets me...

My hope is 2013 all the new bikes have disks brakes and 2014 all the handmade bike guys add the 5mm to the drive side with white ind or smaller brand making the hub ( not going to happen but I can dream!!!) ( I was hoping Giant and Shimano were going to get together with the new Giant but that didn't happen)

My 'cross bike was built with 135mm spacing so I could use XTR or Chris King Classic mtn. bike hubs (non disc). It allows for stronger rear wheels. I have no problem using an Ultegra double with outboard bb. (6600). Chainline is fine and so is heel clearance.

When you make the spacing wider you still center the rim so you are only adding 2.5mm to each side. This is done by adding 5mm to the axle length on the NDS because that's how you make the wheel stronger. The rim has to shift 2.5mm to the left to recenter it.

BobSantini wrote:I don't think you need to widen the NDS to accommodate a disc. There's enough space there already given common accommodations in flange spacing for dish.

I'd like to see more rims with offset spoke beds though. I notice Velocity hasn't continued with the OSB in the A23 rim. I don't know why.

That's never going to work easily with aero rims. It's possible (Lightweight's ventoux is a take on it), but would be complicated.

135 makes loads of sense for discs. I'm all for it.

WIth regard to the statement about that mechanical groups would need a redesign, I'm not sure why - they work fine with discs now (BB7-R), and Shimano have their mech discs on the way. Hell, I've just built two bike with 135mm spacing, force, discs, and they're perfect.

When you make the spacing wider you still center the rim so you are only adding 2.5mm to each side. This is done by adding 5mm to the axle length on the NDS because that's how you make the wheel stronger. The rim has to shift 2.5mm to the left to recenter it.

The last thing you want to do is add space to the cassette side.

Ergott, I don't understand/I am lost? I am thinking that it's the cassette side that is the week side of rear wheel spoke triangle. Why wouldn't moving the rear hub flange cassette side 5mm away from the center line make the wheel stronger?

UCI needs to make it legal for racing before top end bikes will do it. Why would a company invest a lot of money in a top end frame that can't be raced, and can't be marketed under a Pro rider?

Once it is legal all the brands will want the pros to be riding discs, and when the pros are all riding discs then everyone will want them.

I think discs are a great idea for some people, such as those who do a lot of climbing/descending or those who ride in the wet a lot. Yes it is going to add 300-500grams a bike and be less aero, but it appears in a few years you will have little choice just like on MTBs now.People had to learn how to use the power of discs on MTBs to begin with as well and they will learn on road bikes (don't just grab a fist full of lever!!). Yes discs will over heat if you drag them the entire way down a long descent, but then so will Al rims! At least your tyres won't over heat and explode, or side walls collapse!!!

135mm is a good thing, as it will help the DS bracing angle due to the longer shimano 11spd cassette (mind you Mavic and other major brands have been shite for years with the same dish for campy and shimano anyway). Heal strike can be solved by shaping the chain stays, most chain stays already have a bit of bend in them, you'll hardly notice another 2.5mm per side.

uraqt wrote:Ergott, I don't understand/I am lost? I am thinking that it's the cassette side that is the week side of rear wheel spoke triangle. Why wouldn't moving the rear hub flange cassette side 5mm away from the center line make the wheel stronger?

thanks for helping me out!!

C

Its because the changes are at the NDS of the hub, it moves the rim further to the left increasing the angle of the DS spokes and balancing the tension.

(I think)

"Step forward the climber and all those who worship at the altar of lightness" - R. Millar

Remember when road hubs were a standard 126mm before 8-speed shifting came about from Shimano and the industry gravitated to today's standard of 130mm? Of course not. Some of you guys don't know too much history of road cycling. Eddy Merckx never used 130mm. Things change. And there is a ton of more momentum for a change to 135mm than there ever was when road hubs went from 126mm to 130mm.

There already is a TON of rear wheel dish on the drive side. Then, you add in a disc on the non-drive side while keeping hubs at the same 130mm?!?!?! No way! The industry has to go to 135mm hubs to preserve wheel strength. And when you look at the trend going now with Cyclocross bikes with disc hubs... Any decent high-end cyclocross bike that has disc brakes have 135mm hubs. That Colnago road bike with discs? It's 135mm. That high-end Look Cyclocross with discs? It's 135mm.

This is where it is headed. 135mm hubs. MTB, Cylocross, and now Road. Mark it down.

bones wrote:Remember when road hubs were a standard 126mm before 8-speed shifting came about from Shimano and the industry gravitated to today's standard of 130mm? Of course not. Some of you guys don't know too much history of road cycling. Eddy Merckx never used 130mm. Things change. And there is a ton of more momentum for a change to 135mm than there ever was when road hubs went from 126mm to 130mm.

There already is a TON of rear wheel dish on the drive side. Then, you add in a disc on the non-drive side while keeping hubs at the same 130mm?!?!?! No way! The industry has to go to 135mm hubs to preserve wheel strength. And when you look at the trend going now with Cyclocross bikes with disc hubs... Any decent high-end cyclocross bike that has disc brakes have 135mm hubs. That Colnago road bike with discs? It's 135mm. That high-end Look Cyclocross with discs? It's 135mm.

This is where it is headed. 135mm hubs. MTB, Cylocross, and now Road. Mark it down.

I remember when spacing was narrow. I'm sure many others on this forum remember too. In fact, I still have an older steel Basso that I had put in a jig and cold set it wider to accommodate the 8 spd stuff when it first came out. So for you to say "of course not" is a rather arrogant statement imo.

That said, if disc brakes are going to be used on a road frame, then yes, 135mm spacing is pretty much a no brainer. I have a steel touring bike that I built over 10 years ago which has 135mm spacing. Nothing new for touring bikes, allows building stronger 700c wheels on durable mountain type hubs to be used with a wider range of derailleurs and gears. Discs certainly have their applications. I just don't think it's necessarily a no-brainer that they will be on every high end road racing bike in the future, where weight is such an overriding concern. If they can build them equally as light, then maybe. I don't profess to say braking on carbon rims is very much fun in the wet, and disks would at least solve that. But their use on high end road racing bikes raises many other issues, which have been discussed here and in other threads. Some good, some bad... there are tradeoffs both ways. It's an interesting discussion. I'm not in any hurry to get a disc equipped road bike, but I wouldn't rule it out a few years down the road if it becomes obviously superior. But that "if" is pretty big in my mind at the moment. Quite happy with what I've got. Maybe I'm just a "show me" kind of guy.